Scheduling in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks with Priorities

In this paper we consider prioritized maximal scheduling in multi-hop wireless networks, where the scheduler chooses a maximal independent set greedily according to a sequence specified by certain priorities. We show that if the probability distributions of the priorities are properly chosen, we can achieve the optimal (maximum) stability region using an i.i.d random priority assignment process, for any set of arrival processes that satisfy Law of Large Numbers. The pre- computation of the priorities is, in general, NP-hard, but there exists polynomial time approximation scheme (PTAS) to achieve any fraction of the optimal stability region. We next focus on the simple case of static priority and specify a greedy priority assignment algorithm, which can achieve the same fraction of the optimal stability region as the state of art result for longest queue first (LQF) schedulers. We also show that this algorithm can be easily adapted to satisfy delay constraints in the large deviations regime, and therefore, supports quality of service (QoS) for each link.

[1]  Cheng-Shang Chang,et al.  Sample path large deviations and intree networks , 1995, Queueing Syst. Theory Appl..

[2]  Koushik Kar,et al.  Throughput and Fairness Guarantees Through Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[3]  Leandros Tassiulas,et al.  Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks , 1992 .

[4]  Balaji Prabhakar,et al.  The throughput of data switches with and without speedup , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[5]  Roger Wattenhofer,et al.  Local approximation schemes for ad hoc and sensor networks , 2005, DIALM-POMC '05.

[6]  J. Walrand,et al.  Sufficient conditions for stability of longest-queue-first scheduling: second-order properties using fluid limits , 2006, Advances in Applied Probability.

[7]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Large deviations analysis of the generalized processor sharing policy , 1999, Queueing Syst. Theory Appl..

[8]  Saikat Ray,et al.  Arbitrary Throughput Versus Complexity Tradeoffs in Wireless Networks Using Graph Partitioning , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[9]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  The impact of imperfect scheduling on cross-layer rate control in wireless networks , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[10]  Qiao Li,et al.  Prioritized Maximal Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE GLOBECOM 2008 - 2008 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference.

[11]  R. Srikant,et al.  A Large Deviations Analysis of Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[12]  Rohit Negi,et al.  Physical Layer Effect on MAC Performance in Ad-Hoc Wireless Networks , 2003 .

[13]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  On the Complexity of Scheduling in Wireless Networks , 2006, MobiCom '06.

[14]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Understanding the Capacity Region of the Greedy Maximal Scheduling Algorithm in Multihop Wireless Networks , 2008, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[15]  Xiaojun Lin,et al.  The Impact of Imperfect Scheduling on Cross-Layer Rate Control in Multihop Wireless Networks , 2022 .

[16]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Understanding the capacity region of the Greedy maximal scheduling algorithm in multihop wireless networks , 2009, TNET.

[17]  Leonid Khachiyan,et al.  Approximate Max-Min Resource Sharing for Structured Concave Optimization , 2000, SIAM J. Optim..

[18]  Nick McKeown,et al.  Scheduling algorithms for input-queued cell switches , 1996 .

[19]  R. Srikant,et al.  Low-Complexity Distributed Scheduling Algorithms for Wireless Networks , 2009, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.